GraftMeIn:
I don´t want to be impolite, but say, do you just play stupid?
If you flip to the first pages in your Bible (really the first pages!) you will find a date when it was printed.
For example, my copy is from 1984.
Does that mean that the Bible was written in 1984?
Robert von Ranke-Graves did not write the greek mythology. He compiled old texts (like the ones from Pliny and others) and brought them into a consistent and readable form.
I´m sorry. I could not find anything about the oldest existing sources of these myths, but I know that they exist, and that they are quite old.
I will continue to search for sources, and post the result.
The oldest existing source for the Bible, on the other hand, are the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating from about 150 b.c.
What does that tell us about the creation of the world? Nothing!
To use your quote: why should I believe something that was written 2150 years ago?
The Bible is not the only existing text that contains a story about the creation of the world, nor is it the oldest.
Genesis has been translated by a group of experts in language, there are original texts it has been translated from, even the dead sea scroll translations back up much of what is written in the Bible.
Yes, so what? Do you think v.Ranke-Graves did not speak old greek, or that his sources differ from his translations?
This still doesn't tell me when it was written, Isn't there one book like the bible? are there any ancient scrolls or texts, in existence like the ones the bible has to back it up? And why should I trust one persons translation about what it says?
There is not a single book. Does that make in invalid? There is also not a single book containing the NT. Does that make it invalid in your eyes?
And why should you trust someones translation of the Bible? Do you read it in hebrew/aramaic/greek?
It is irrelevant. A text that is 2000 years old can be as wrong as a text that is one year old. It can be translated, copied, quoted in whatever kind you like - that does not say anything about the validity of its contend.
So much for the sources.
What makes Genesis the same as the myths from other religions? I think there is a huge difference between one God that is eternal, and many Gods that were born.
What makes it different? There was some chaos, there was a God, there was some creation.
Genesis creation makes sense to you? Fine! Pelasgian creation made sense to a lot of old greeks.
And, hey, creation of the sun after the earth does NOT make sense to me. The problems with gravity alone would have been tremendous!
I also think there is a huge difference between one Gods and many Gods. Does that have any bearing about the truth of this story? No!
"My story is right because there is just one God, yours is wrong because there are many!"
"My story is right because the first human is called Adam, yours is wrong because he is called Pelasgos."
Is there a difference?